Disseminated on behalf of Surge Battery Metals Inc.
The global race for electric vehicles (EVs) and renewable energy storage is accelerating fast. But beyond the hype around resource discoveries, a quieter and more critical race is taking shape, the race for lithium purity. While many lithium developers highlight their large deposits, what truly matters to EV and battery manufacturers is the ability to deliver ultra-pure, battery-grade lithium.
Surge Battery Metals (TSXV: NILI, OTC: NILIF) is emerging as a leader in this next phase of the lithium story. The company is not just measuring tons in the ground, it is proving its ability to produce 99.9% pure lithium carbonate, the key ingredient for advanced EV batteries. With its Nevada North Lithium Project (NNLP), NILI is positioning itself to supply premium-quality lithium directly to top-tier EV and energy storage manufacturers.
The company also achieved a significant milestone this September. It signed an LOI with Evolution Mining (ASX: EVN) to form a joint venture at NNLP. Under the agreement, Surge retains 77% and Evolution starts with 23%, funding up to C$10 million for the Preliminary Feasibility Study. This investment could increase Evolution’s stake to 32.5%, while Surge remains as project manager.
In addition, Evolution contributes 75% of its mineral rights on 880 acres of private land, plus 21,000 more acres of highly prospective ground. This significantly expands the project’s footprint.
Moving forward, the JV will focus on advancing the Pre-Feasibility Study, building directly on the strong 2025 PEA results and setting the stage for the next development phase.
Why Purity Matters: The Technical Case for 99.9%
In the battery world, purity is not just a technical metric; it is the difference between success and failure. EV makers and battery cell producers need lithium carbonate and hydroxide with purity levels of at least 99.5%. Increasingly, the bar is being raised to 99.9% or higher.
Even trace amounts of iron, magnesium, or boron can cause major problems. These impurities shorten battery life, reduce energy density, and increase safety risks. As automakers shift to more advanced chemistries like NMC (nickel-manganese-cobalt) and solid-state batteries, the demand for cleaner, high-spec lithium becomes non-negotiable. However, NMC batteries had a drawback. They depended on costly and volatile metals like nickel and cobalt.
And thus, LFP batteries emerged as a game-changer.
LFP Batteries Are Now Reshaping EVs
LFP, or lithium iron phosphate batteries, remove nickel and cobalt entirely, using iron and phosphate instead. These materials are cheaper, safer, and easier to source. LFP batteries also last longer, charge faster, and handle heat better, making them ideal for affordable, large-scale EV production.
- In 2022, LFP accounted for 37% of global EV battery chemistry. By 2024, it reached nearly 50%, and the trend continues.
For lithium investors, this matters. LFP relies heavily on lithium carbonate, the purest, most in-demand form of lithium. With nickel and cobalt out, lithium becomes central, tightening markets as more EV makers adopt LFP
High-purity lithium does more than meet technical standards. It also commands higher prices and long-term supply contracts. Automakers and energy storage providers prefer suppliers who can consistently deliver premium-quality lithium while maintaining environmental responsibility. For them, reliability, repeatability, and sustainability are just as important as cost.
The Nevada North Lithium Project: Scale with Substance
NILI’s flagship Nevada North Lithium Project (NNLP) combines resource scale with exceptional quality. Located in Nevada, a region known for its lithium-rich claystone deposits, NNLP has an inferred resource of 8.65 million tonnes of lithium carbonate equivalent (LCE), grading 2,955 ppm lithium at a 1,250 ppm cutoff.
These numbers put it among the most promising new lithium projects in North America. But NILI’s true edge comes from its ability to turn that resource into battery-grade lithium carbonate. Laboratory and pilot-scale metallurgical tests have already confirmed purity levels at or above 99.9%, far exceeding typical chemical-grade standards.
According to the company’s Preliminary Economic Assessment (PEA), completed by M3 Engineering & Technology and Independent Mining Consultants, the project is designed for scale and efficiency.
Key highlights include:
- Annual output: 86,300 tonnes of LCE, expandable to 109,100 tonnes at full production.
- Recovery rate: Averaging 82.8%, thanks to advanced leaching and purification processes.
- Operating cost: As low as $5,097 per tonne LCE, ensuring competitive margins.
- Mine life: Estimated at 42 years, based on a conventional open-pit operation.
This combination of high-grade resource and proven processing ability gives NNLP a powerful advantage in a market shifting toward quality over quantity.
Inside NILI’s Metallurgical Advantage
Metallurgical testing is where NILI truly sets itself apart. Turning claystone into battery-grade lithium requires technical mastery and process control. Surge’s team has developed a refined purification flowsheet tailored to Nevada’s unique claystone composition.
Recent pilot-scale trials achieved lithium carbonate purity of 99.9% or higher, meeting or exceeding international benchmarks. These tests also showed strong impurity control, particularly for metals like iron and boron, which are critical for EV battery safety.
Mr. Greg Reimer, Chief Executive Officer, and Director commented,
“Beyond our initial metallurgical and analytical works in 2023 to estimate acid consumption and identify the clay types, we are very pleased to have taken the next step and have passed the important ‘proof of concept’ trial showing that the clays of our Nevada North Lithium Project can be used to produce lithium carbonate exceeding 99% purity. In doing so, we have managed the technological risk sufficient to warrant the next step, which will include upsizing the laboratory trials to build a sufficient inventory of technical grade lithium carbonate that we can purify to demonstrate if the NNLP clay is a suitable source to produce battery-grade lithium carbonate.”
NILI’s process is both efficient and sustainable. By optimizing reagent use and reducing energy consumption, the company supports strong environmental, social, and governance (ESG) goals while keeping costs low.
A Step-by-Step Look at NILI’s Lithium Purification
Here’s a simplified look at NILI’s five-step purification process that converts raw claystone into 99.9% pure lithium carbonate:
- Ore Preparation and Leaching: The lithium-rich claystone is mined, milled, and treated with acid to dissolve lithium from the rock.
- Solid-Liquid Separation: The resulting slurry is filtered to isolate a lithium-rich solution from unwanted solids.
- Selective Impurity Removal: Using precipitation, ion-exchange, and solvent extraction, key impurities like magnesium, calcium, and boron are removed.
- Lithium Carbonate Precipitation: The purified solution reacts with carbonate sources such as soda ash to form lithium carbonate crystals.
- Final Polishing and Quality Control: The crystals are dried, rechecked for purity, and recirculated if needed to achieve consistent 99.9% results.
This closed-loop design maximizes recovery while minimizing waste, an important feature for both efficiency and sustainability.
Commercial Significance: Why OEMs Are Watching Closely
As the lithium market evolves, a clear divide is forming. Companies capable of producing high-purity, battery-grade material are securing premium contracts and long-term partnerships. Others producing lower-grade lithium face downward pricing pressure and limited buyers.
Energy Storage Systems (ESS) are now becoming a major swing factor in lithium demand. After what looked like a soft stretch for lithium prices, ESS battery shipments have shown massive growth year-to-date. Updated J.P. Morgan forecasts increased ESS shipments +50% for this year and +43% for next year, with ESS now projected to represent 30% of total lithium demand by 2026, rising to 36% by 2030.
By 2030, total lithium demand is expected to reach ~2.8 Mt LCE, aligning with the consensus range referenced by Albemarle. Meanwhile, global EV demand is forecast to grow 3–5% annually between 2025–2030 — making ESS the category that prevents a persistent market surplus and tightens supply.
At the same time, the company aligns with North American supply chain goals, offering secure, ESG-compliant lithium production close to home. With the U.S. and Canadian governments pushing for “friendshoring” of strategic minerals, NILI’s Nevada-based project fits perfectly into the policy framework for domestic critical mineral supply.
By focusing on purity and process control, NILI aims not only to sell lithium but to become a trusted technology and supply chain partner for OEMs seeking quality assurance and long-term reliability.
For Investors: Why Processing Capability Matters
For investors, NILI’s story goes beyond having a large lithium deposit. The real value lies in its processing expertise. Producing 99.9% battery-grade lithium at a commercial scale requires deep technical know-how, efficient design, and capital discipline.
NILI’s PEA shows impressive financial metrics:
- After-tax NPV: US$9.21 billion (at 8% discount).
- Internal Rate of Return (IRR): 22.8%.
- Payback period: Less than five years.
- High operating margins, supported by strong resource grades and cost-effective processing.
These numbers underline a vital message: processing quality drives profitability. Investors looking for long-term exposure to the clean energy transition should note that companies capable of producing high-purity lithium will capture premium market share and valuation upside.
The Purity Premium in the Lithium Race
As the global energy transition speeds up, success will depend not just on who can find lithium but on who can refine it to perfection. Surge Battery Metals is proving it can deliver battery-grade lithium carbonate with 99.9% purity, meeting the toughest technical and commercial standards in the industry.
And that is a powerful differentiator for investors. NILI’s combination of resource scale, refining precision, and strategic positioning in Nevada gives it a strong foundation to become a leading supplier to the North American EV and energy storage markets.
In the new lithium economy, purity equals power, and NILI is setting the benchmark for both.
DISCLAIMER
New Era Publishing Inc. and/or CarbonCredits.com (“We” or “Us”) are not securities dealers or brokers, investment advisers, or financial advisers, and you should not rely on the information herein as investment advice. Surge Battery Metals Inc. (“Company”) made a one-time payment of $50,000 to provide marketing services for a term of two months. None of the owners, members, directors, or employees of New Era Publishing Inc. and/or CarbonCredits.com currently hold, or have any beneficial ownership in, any shares, stocks, or options of the companies mentioned.
This article is informational only and is solely for use by prospective investors in determining whether to seek additional information. It does not constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy any securities. Examples that we provide of share price increases pertaining to a particular issuer from one referenced date to another represent arbitrarily chosen time periods and are no indication whatsoever of future stock prices for that issuer, and are of no predictive value.
Our stock profiles are intended to highlight certain companies for your further investigation; they are not stock recommendations or an offer or sale of the referenced securities. The securities issued by the companies we profile should be considered high-risk; if you do invest despite these warnings, you may lose your entire investment. Please do your own research before investing, including reviewing the companies’ SEDAR+ and SEC filings, press releases, and risk disclosures.
It is our policy that the information contained in this profile was provided by the company, extracted from SEDAR+ and SEC filings, company websites, and other publicly available sources. We believe the sources and information are accurate and reliable but we cannot guarantee them.
CAUTIONARY STATEMENT AND FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION
Certain statements contained in this news release may constitute “forward-looking information” within the meaning of applicable securities laws. Forward-looking information generally can be identified by words such as “anticipate,” “expect,” “estimate,” “forecast,” “plan,” and similar expressions suggesting future outcomes or events. Forward-looking information is based on current expectations of management; however, it is subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from those anticipated.
These factors include, without limitation, statements relating to the Company’s exploration and development plans, the potential of its mineral projects, financing activities, regulatory approvals, market conditions, and future objectives. Forward-looking information involves numerous risks and uncertainties and actual results might differ materially from results suggested in any forward-looking information. These risks and uncertainties include, among other things, market volatility, the state of financial markets for the Company’s securities, fluctuations in commodity prices, operational challenges, and changes in business plans.
Forward-looking information is based on several key expectations and assumptions, including, without limitation, that the Company will continue with its stated business objectives and will be able to raise additional capital as required. Although management of the Company has attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially, there may be other factors that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated, or intended.
There can be no assurance that such forward-looking information will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking information. Additional information about risks and uncertainties is contained in the Company’s management’s discussion and analysis and annual information form for the year ended December 31, 2024, copies of which are available on SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.ca.
The forward-looking information contained herein is expressly qualified in its entirety by this cautionary statement. Forward-looking information reflects management’s current beliefs and is based on information currently available to the Company. The forward-looking information is made as of the date of this news release, and the Company assumes no obligation to update or revise such information to reflect new events or circumstances except as may be required by applicable law.
The post From Resource to Battery-Grade: How NILI Aims to Deliver 99.9% Purity Lithium appeared first on Carbon Credits.
Nature-based carbon investments deserve consideration when they address a specific business dependency and produce outcomes you can measure. Imagine Moonbucks, a global coffee roaster planning next season’s espresso blend. It is considering natural Grade 4 coffee from Jimma, in southwestern Oromia, Ethiopia. Its sourcing decisions affect the roasting schedule and the cash tied up in coffee purchases. Moonbucks needs to understand which measures could protect that supply, what they would cost and how it would judge the results.
1. Define the sourcing problem before choosing a project
Moonbucks needs a dependable component for its espresso blend. Its procurement team wants continuity of volume and an agreed cup profile. Replacing a shipment at short notice could require new sample approval and changes to the blend, and given the schedules for cultivation, processing, and freight delivery, is practically impossible. Moonbucks needs to get this right, and its initial concern is inconsistent deliveries. It commissions an assessment of the supplying farms and post-harvest chain. The questions cover land condition, harvest availability and whether drying or storage problems are affecting saleable lots.
This distinction changes the investment brief. A tree-planting proposal cannot be assumed to fix drying problems. Better storage cannot restore eroded land. The team must establish which problem exists before selecting the response.
CCC’s guide to finding nature-based solutions in your supply chain explains where to look. Here, the next task is to turn a broad concern into a testable proposal.
2. Develop nature-based carbon investments around the actual supply chain
The assessment would trace Moonbucks’ purchases back through the exporter and supplying producer groups. Which farms supply the contracted lots? Who controls land-management decisions? How long does the buyer expect to maintain the purchasing relationship?
Furthermore, Jimma natural Grade 4 cannot be treated as interchangeable with every Ethiopian coffee. Moonbucks would need to test any substitute against its own blend and quality requirements.
Suppose Moonbucks’ assessment identifies an opportunity to maintain shade trees and restore vegetation along exposed streambanks. The IPCC describes agroforestry as a way to store carbon in vegetation and soil, with potential benefits for erosion control and water quality.1 Moonbucks would need local advice on species, growing conditions and maintenance before deciding how these measures fit its sourcing plan.
The proposal now has a defined sourcing connection and a candidate intervention. The next steps are to test its effect on production, assess carbon eligibility and build the financial case.
3. Compare the proposal with other ways to protect supply
WBCSD’s Nature-based Solutions Blueprint recommends comparing nature-based options with other responses across their benefits and costs.2 For Moonbucks, that means evaluating the landscape proposal alongside drying improvements, storage controls and alternative sourcing arrangements.
The product’s natural-process designation matters. Moonbucks should examine the drying and dry-milling chain alongside land conditions. Its team would check storage practices, contamination risks and incoming-lot quality to see whether problems arise before or after the coffee leaves the farms.
The revised proposal might combine land stewardship with separate post-harvest controls. Each component needs its own purpose and budget. A sustainability label should not obscure which activity is expected to solve which problem.
The project develops as the evidence improves. Its scope should follow the diagnosis rather than preserve the first idea unchanged.
4. Establish what the carbon outcome could count toward
Moonbucks’ sustainability team now tests the proposed carbon case separately from the sourcing case. Is the objective a measurable change in Moonbucks’ value-chain emissions, verified credits for separate voluntary use, or distinct outcomes under carefully defined arrangements?
Scope 3 covers value-chain emissions. A purchasing relationship alone does not prove that a farm intervention can be included in Moonbucks’ inventory. The team needs an applicable accounting method, defensible boundaries and evidence supporting attribution.
SBTi’s FLAG Guidance (forest, land and agriculture), version 1.2, says purchased credits used as offsets cannot meet near-term FLAG or energy and industry targets. Eligible land-based removals are subject to accounting requirements.3 Moonbucks needs to test its proposal against those rules before including an outcome in its targets.
For Moonbucks’ Jimma proposal, maintaining existing trees and establishing new vegetation could involve different carbon questions. Specialists must examine the baseline and additionality, meaning what changes because the project proceeds. They must also assess measurement and the risk that stored carbon is lost. CCC’s MRV and additionality article introduces those tests.
Until that work is complete, Moonbucks should not budget an assumed Scope 3 reduction or credit-sale receipt. Direct emissions reductions remain the priority.
5. Build a financial case that survives weaker assumptions
Moonbucks’ finance team would now build a multi-year budget. UNEP’s State of Finance for Nature 2023 compares current finance with the investment needed to meet climate, biodiversity and land-restoration goals.4 The company would cost its proposed activities, farmer participation and ongoing monitoring. Verification, where required, is a separate expense. Maintenance and responsibility for replacing failed plantings must remain visible after the initial establishment budget ends.
Operational benefits need equally careful treatment. If fewer rejected lots reduce emergency purchasing, count that saving once. Do not add “supply resilience” as another financial benefit when it represents the same avoided cost.
Moonbucks should compare a base case with slower benefits, higher implementation costs and no carbon revenue. It should also distinguish production outcomes from quality and shipment outcomes. A single good harvest would not prove that the landscape intervention caused better delivery performance.
A project can remain worth funding even when its carbon case needs more work. That decision must rest on the operational evidence and the company’s objectives, without unsupported environmental claims.
6. Fund a pilot with a clear expansion decision
Moonbucks’ first approval would fund a bounded pilot, rather than commit the entire sourcing program. Before spending, Moonbucks would agree on participating farms, responsibilities and the evidence needed at review.
Its scorecard could track farmer participation, implementation costs and plant survival, alongside accepted coffee volumes and lot-quality results. Carbon measurements would follow the selected method. Farm-level traceability must connect the intervention to the actual sourcing relationship.
Suppose Moonbucks’ review later finds that storage changes explain most quality improvements, while the land measures need longer observation. Those findings would shape the next decision: expand the proven component, adjust the landscape work or pause further spending. They would not justify crediting all improvements to tree planting.
This gives nature-based carbon investments a practical place in a multi-year strategy. Funding increases as the evidence supports it, and the project can change direction before a larger commitment.
Discuss a sourcing opportunity with CCC
Carbon Credit Capital’s nature-based supply-chain investment service uses its Dual-Value Model to examine supply-chain economics alongside potential sustainability outcomes.
Schedule a consultation to discuss your sourcing exposure and the questions to resolve before allocating capital.
Sources
- Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate Change, Chapter 7, Agriculture, Forestry and Other Land Uses, section 7.4.3.3 (Agroforestry).
- World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD), Nature-based Solutions Blueprint, 5 June 2024.
- Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi), Forest, Land and Agriculture Science-Based Target-Setting Guidance, version 1.2, March 2026, section 3.1.4, pp. 37–38.
- United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), State of Finance for Nature 2023, 2023.
A plastic credit funds the collection of plastic waste in places where no formal system exists to collect it. Each credit represents a measured, independently audited quantity of plastic taken out of the environment or returned to use, tracked on a public registry.
EU carbon credit claims changed on 27 September 2026, the day the Directive (EU) 2024/825 began to apply across the European Union. The change is narrow. It changes how a company can talk about the credits it buys. A product can no longer be called neutral on the strength of compensation alone; however, every specific, evidenced statement about what a company measured, reduced, and funded stays fully available.
